Jump to content

FYI

Members
  • Content Count

    10448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    168

Posts posted by FYI

  1. Or the Brisbane fetish, Almaty fetish, L.A. fetish, or whatever else tickles your Olympic fancy fetish. It’s not even worth the  bother with BFB (boycott fetish boy).

    I’ve mainly commented when articles of Republican hypocrite politicians have  come into play. Cause yeah, trying to have any sort of discourse with BFB is really a moot point with the boycott blinders they have on.

  2. 4 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

    This is why only large cities with a great deal of infrastructure should be hosting the Olympics and any city that needs to build a whole Olympic park from scratch should be told no from the get go

    Yeah, sure. Another nice in theory, but wouldn’t work in practice if no large (viable) cities are on the table for any given Games. Cuz apparently, that’s why the 2032 Games, which appear to be handed-over on a silver platter very soon, to a (smaller) city that would require quite a deal of investment in infrastructure in order so they can host.

  3. Well, at least in mostly Democratic countries, the Olympics were starting to lose their appeal even before Corona. Mainly countries with “something to prove”, like Qatar, India & Indonesia, seem to be the only ones that wanna bother right now. That’s probably why the IOC (well, mainly Coates & Bach, that is) has jumped on Brisbane so far in advance as they did. Whether or not that’s still the right move, remains to be seen, considering how much work Brisbane will still need to do, even if the plan calls for very spread-out venues. The Olympics are very expensive to pull-off no matter what. So to find the right balancing act for them is still a big work-in-progress.

  4. I agree with wanting Tokyo to have the full experience. I remember in July 2019 looking so forward to Tokyo 2020. Remembering the closing ceremony in Rio 2016 & how awesome the Tokyo 2020 presentation was. But I also agree that having Tokyo 2020ne versus having no Olympics at all, is better than nothing.

    So many other things are also starting to come back to normal, not only in the sports world. But into filming shows/movies, having studio audiences back (still with masks though) & theme parks opening back up, etc. So why can’t the Olympics still go on in that capacity as well. I understand that it won’t be the 100% experience from previous Olympics, but this is the boat we’re now in until further notice. So why not make the best we can out of it, with all the precautions necessary.

  5. 31 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

    If my relationship was on the rocks, and it was a girl I liked, and the only chance to get back together with her was that she wanted a phone call to tell her how pretty she was, I would do it.  By calling up Tblisi, Almaty, Erzurum, none of those are ideal, but the Olympic movement is not going to collapse with one of them hosting it.  It WILL collapse if NONE of them hosts it.  If a phone call behind the scenes gets it done, get it done, dignity and tradition be damned.  

    NO, the Winter Olympics will not “collapse” if none of those places hosts it. That’s just being hyperbolic now. It would, however, make it for another controversial Games, which is the last thing the IOC needs right now. Erzurum (& most likely Tbilisi, too) in particular, need A LOT of infrastructure to pull it off (much like Barcelona would need to do, which you discounted in another thread precisely for that same reason). It’s what got the IOC into trouble with Sochi to begin with. I’m sure that’s not a look that the IOC wants; another overblown-budget Winter Olympics in a less-than democratic place. That would surely get more cities lining up to host. 

    40 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

    The winter games, there isn’t even the luxury of a tiered system.  The criteria is:  Do you exist?  Do you want to host the winter games?  Very much a different dynamic.  There is no more HGTV dynamic of three homes, all are nice, but none that have all the options you want.  The IOC can no longer say "oh no.......a blue bathroom, thats a deal breaker for me". Now the criteria is, you buy the house if it has running water because thats the 2021 real estate market, and in this case........that is the market of the winter olympics IMO.  Maybe im more of a pessimist I guess.

    LOL, you & your analogies. But like real estate, the Olympics are also about: “location, location, location!” A house can have EVERYTHING that one could possibly want (or at least mostly of what one wants), but if it’s location is totally somewhere where you don’t want to be, then that house means absolutely nothing. It’s the same with the Olympics. A bid can offer most of the things the IOC is looking for. But if the bids location is not where the IOC wants to particularly be, then that bid also means nothing.

  6. 35 minutes ago, iceman530 said:

    If there is no clear cut candidate by next year, the IOC needs to work the lines of literally every country that has snow and is cold, no matter how third world, no matter how despotic (so long as its not China) to see if they want to host.  Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkey, it wont matter (well, of course it will matter in the sense that it shows a problem with the process, but you take what you can get for the sake of survival).  

    What Quaker said:

    17 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

    You're starting to sound a little nonsensical when you're suggesting the IOC call up anyone and everyone to try and draw them in.  That's much more of an act of desperation than to award an Olympics to literally the safest place they could possibly put it (even if the timing is less than ideal).  

    Right now the IOC has a pretty shoddy reputation between awarding the Olympics to totalitarian regimes and a less than transparent selection process that has people questioning what they're doing.  Won't help the cause if their message to the world is "hey, we really need someone to host the Olympics.. any takers?"  The IOC should already be doing some serious soul searching to realize how they got into this mess in the first place.  

    And I’d further add, tell “give the Winter Olympics to any despot available for the sake of survival” to all the politicians & athletes from all over, who have publicly come out against Beijing 2022 & that “the IOC must move the 2022 Olympics to a location that ‘respects’ freedom & human rights”. And that “the IOC must really think twice before awarding Games to authoritarian regimes so that the athletes themselves can focus on their training & competitions, & not about worrying about boycotts, or whether or not they’ll make their own determinations of attending controversial Games”. 

    Your logic there goes against those views, to say the least. To use an analogy of yours in the FIFA thread, that’s like taking the ugliest guy or girl to the school prom cause all the studs or beauty queens didn’t want to go with you. Total desperation shouldn’t be an excuse to make even more foolish choices. That’s what has gotten the IOC into trouble ITFP. And if that makes the IOC use the SLC emergency button on this one, so be it. That’s what it’s there for TBW, isn’t it.

    27 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

    Azerbaijan?  Sounds a little ba-kukoo to me! :D

    Right?! :wacko::lol:

  7. If SLC was to host 2030, it would be for more concerning matters (i.e. no other *credible* bid is on the table for that year), rather than about some anniversary that’s not even theirs to begin with. Even L.A. 2028 isn’t going to be hosting their 100th anniversary in 2032.

    The IOC doesn’t generally award Olympics on anniversaries anyway. Just ask Athens’ 1996 bid team that. The only exception lately is Paris 2024. But that had much more to do with other important matters than their centennial anniversary of their last Games.

×
×
  • Create New...